QOTD: News from Social Networking sites? Good thing or a bad thing?

This is a quote from Procons.

" Social networking sites are a top news source for 27.8% of Americans, ranking below newspapers (28.8%) and above radio (18.8%) and print publications (6%). "

QOTD: In your opinion, is it a good thing almost the same amount of people who use newspapers for their news source use social networking sites? Is it a bad thing? Explain.


"Hrmm... I guess I've never really been one to think of Facebook or Twitter or other social networking sites as a place where I'd get accurate news that isn't completely driven by the giver's opinion... 

But then again... when you really think about it, even traditional news sources will spin the truth by an opinion to try making the public feel a certain way about the topic. So perhaps I shouldn't think it too strange." 

- H. Z.

"This is a fascinating topic. Historically, as societies evolve and develop, news is disseminated in various different ways. For most of human history, it has been the oral tradition that dominated. In the middle ages, and for much of antiquity, a town crier would stand in the town square (usually upon a pedestal) and introduce the important news to the people. These could be anything from advertising for a certain shop in town (Yes, they had commercials even back then!) to various decrees by the kings and emperors of the time. 

Oral communication was important for a number of reasons. The printing press was only invented by Gutenburg in 1439- although there were cruder 'block presses' before which attempting to mass produce writing. Before the invention of the printing press, every book was written by hand. This made them a considerable time investment, which meant that the written word was extremely expensive in terms of cost. Thus, newspapers were just too expensive to be efficient. Since writing was expensive, reading became a thing of the elite. Those who had wealth and power, learned to read. The common person would not. 

This is why oral news was extremely important. It was very easy to shout, and everyone would understand you. Now, after industrialization, you had the invention of the printing press which made it extremely easy to create the written word. This spurred people to learn to read, as knowledge became disseminated easily throughout the known world. 

The first modern newspaper is actually traced to germany, in the year 1605 by Johann Carolus called "Account of all distinguished and commemorable news." But even back then, news was not just news. This is why this question is so interesting. News has always been about opinions, and from the very beginning it was news with a bit of opinion. As media developed, especially in the United States, you had an element of opinion and what the news world calls "Spinning" where you angle the facts to portray a certain viewpoint. This reached its peak in the 20th century with the rise of "Yello Journalism" in New York City, which was news that attempted to sensationalize and entertain, rather than tell news, in an attempt to sell money. 

With the rise of the internet in the 21st century, we're seeing now a shift away from traditional news in the form of writing on paper, to news written digitally. This has had interesting consequences. Information on an international scale is now tightly knit, and I can find news about everything going on globally in a matter of seconds. Also, unlike traditional news, anyone can write on the internet. This has created a democratic outlet where literally hundreds of opinions can be viewed online, from the crazy to the moderate, with absolutely no accountability. 

Do you see why this is such a fascinating question? 

What you're really asking is if it's a good thing that suddenly, instead of the opinions of ten important news agencies, I get the opinions of over a million different people. Which can seem good, but it's also terrible. 

I mean, now there's so much information, that the truth has been covered. The truth is distracted by a million different opinions, that it takes actual effort to uncover it. Alternatively, now the truth is accessible to anyone. Anyone can write, express, and disgest information online. 

With all that said, I think it's a good thing. I think even though it has caused, and will cause, problems with over-saturation of opinion and even more yellow journalism, writing online is cheap and takes the power out of the hands of several main news outlets. That is the beauty of progress. It increases freedom, thought, and opinion. 

So yes, it's a good thing."

-A. Z.

Questions of the Day have been successful, I think! (QOTD: Significance of belief?)

Not that it is over, but it has been steady with a reply on all but a few questions. (These are usually questions in which I reply to said question with a bonus question, but then it doesn't get replied to. Boo.)

Anyhow, let's recap them in order.


QOTD: What is the significance of having a belief? By this, I mean, if you are religious, why? What is the significance of having your religion? (This is not a debate. This is not a "I am a Muslim instead of Christian because. .." This is a "I am religious, whatever religion that may be, because of 'this' significance. " or a "In general, religion is or is not significant because of this...") I would like to state a rule for this post only. In order to keep this from a debate, you must only post ONCE to this comment. If you feel more comfortable messaging me privately with your views, please do! Do not post in response to any comment but this original question. Thank you!


"I guess my short answer to this is: "I believe, because I've been through too much to do otherwise. I desperately want to be with those I have lost again someday when it's my time, and when you get right down to it, the world is too dark and empty of a place to go it "alone" or without it."" 

-H. Z.

"This is a deceptively complex question. Let me start by saying I'm going to be answering this to the best of my knowledge, but I am a Historian, not a theologian. So please take all of this with a grain of salt. 

That said, let's consider for a moment that there is a very definite different between religion and belief. A religion is the final evolution of a belief, but people have beliefs all the time, about things as simple as luck to as complex as Christianity. 

Historically, as others have mentioned, religion was a mechanism which society relied on to explain the unexplainable world. This includes things such as the nature of water and air, to why do bad things happen. Religion also ordered society, because it allowed a ruling class (Priests and Kings) to maintain their rule through divine blessing. 

Now, this is all here nor there, because I haven't actually answered your question yet. Again, bear with me. This is a very complicated topic! 

History has shown us that religion can be the crafter of some of the most beautiful things (Sistine Chapel) and is also the reason some of the worst wars have been fought (The Crusades), which really makes this a hard question. 

Now, finally, after laying the foundations and keeping all of the previous statements in mind, I will say this: 
It is my belief that belief is very important in life, and extremely significant. It can be religious or not, but having one is what keeps humanity grounded. Without beliefs, civilization historically would've never existed. If belief in the form of religion had not dictated laws for people to work together, humanity would've remained a hunter gathered society. Belief is extremely important because it separates humanity from the animals. It answers questions such as, "What is my purpose? Do I have a soul?" 

Belief is the mark of sentience. It is what allows us to be grounded that the world is not going to fall out from under us. It is belief that drives reason and rational thought, and in turn, civilizations."

-A. Z.

"This is a question that I feel is a lot more implicating than most people would think at first. It's obviously tough, and know one will argue that. But what is implied to me in the wording, is that it is possible to not have a belief. I would challenge that this isn't so. 

I'd like to propose, that the soundest Atheist and Agnostic do themselves have a belief in something. They would like to challenge me on this, and they often do. But let me first make the case that it is wholly illogical to say: "I do not believe what I feel is correct." We all believe that our conclusions are correct. And we all make conclusions. Even if they are: "I conclude that the question is unanswerable and no one can know." By claiming this, you conclude that no fellow human should be able to answer the question either, thus making your stance the right one. You believe you're right. 

Now to address the question in more of the direct way that you intended it to be. I am religious, because I am a scientist. 

*Everyone derp faces* 

Contrary to belief, I don't think these two things are at war. Quite the opposite. I would reference to those that counter me the theory of Occam's razor: "The simplest solution is most often the correct one." This is a governing rule in the scientific process, and one I feel makes my point. Divine intervention in the process of the universe is my argued simplest solution. One that brings me -- and the majority of the human race -- the most peaceful sleep at night. 

This leads to my second and final point: if you -- and mind you I say this in full objectiveness, and without meaningful condemnation -- if you consider yourself to be nonreligious, you are in the vast minority of the human existence. This is simply a fact. But one I feel holding many implications itself. You can make the poor argument that herd mentality alone propagates religious beliefs. But I do not feel comfortable myself discrediting the genius and logic of millions of our greatest forefathers. 

I simply challenge anyone to consider what concrete basis you are placing your beliefs on, if the overwhelming whole of civilizations past and present have utterly missed the mark by disagreeing with. 

I am religious, because it is the conclusion I have made to make the most sense of my existence. It is logical, comforting, sensible, and overwhelmingly satisfying at this stage in my life discovery process."

-P. D.

"The significance that religion has, or rather, why it came to be, was because humans wanted answers to the world around us. Long before we had science and technology to gain the answers we have now, humans made up beautiful, tragic, brutal, and creative stories about divine beings who were in charge of the elements, who acted as guardians, and lived above humans as a superior race. In fact, I think religion was mankind's greatest literary work. 

Religions have evolved and taken from each other over thousands of years and the significance of it now is that some people find comfort in thinking that there is a god/gods who take an interest in our personal welfare and want only the best for us. 

But I think the ultimate significance, is that religion serves as a way for humans to be immortal. To be eternal. Many people are too scared that after this, there is nothing. Religion provides an afterlife with loved ones and I honestly think that is the reason so many people still cling to religion. 

As she said this was not a debate, but I would be more than willing to talk more on this subject in a private message as well. I am always interested in why people involve themselves in religion."

-A. M.

I should mention in the case of any confusion that I myself recognize there are people who believe in any type of religion and those who do not. I am merely asking why you do or do not. (Just in case anyone felt I was trying to attack anyone who is religious. This is not the case. Anyhow, with that in mind, thank you for the posts so far. May they continue to be as insightful. )

QOTD - What is success?

QOTD1 - 3/10/2014: "What is success? What does it mean to be accomplished/successful? When you look at someone and think, 'man, they sure look successful,' why do you think that? Can you measure success?"

'To me, success is anything in the form of an accomplishment that you've worked hard to attain and are proud of. It could be finishing home improvement projects, finally finding the right job, or starting / raising your own family. I think success can be measured in happiness. If you're happy, you're successful... right?'  - H. Z.

'I think it depends on your personal view of success  For one who is an entrepreneur, they may look at anyone from Donald Trump to a local small business owner as being 'successful.' For others, they may see it when they observe someone raising a family. Personally, I tend to attribute 'success' to goals set and reached. That's probably the most generic (maybe still incorrect) way to put it. Lol. Also, I do also participate in the knee-jerk reaction of seeing someone with nice things/lots of money and assume they are successful. A lot of times, it couldn't be further from the truth, but I think it's the perception a lot of us tend to have.' -A. L.

Myself, I agree with the authors above. I had a few PMs that would like to remain anonymous, but two of them in particular listed almost a response to A. L., "Why DO we knee-jerk at someone who spends a lot of cash and call them successful?"

One person said, "Perhaps it is because everyone craves money. We don't think we do, but we do. If you want to be in a successful band? You need money to get it started, and then you're chasing it ever since. If you want to start a business? You need money. If you want to become an actress or actor? You need money, you make money, and then you want more of it because it defines your worth. Parents want money - it allows them to spend some extra cash on their children and save some for themselves. Bottom line is, money makes the world go around, and thus, if we see someone spending it like it's pocket change to them, we automatically think, "Damn, they are so successful they can walk out of Victoria's Secret with five bras like they were shopping at Ross Dress-for-Less." We either get jealous, or curious. We want to know their secret. We want to have that money. Why? Because it's a measurement of success."

The other person, "Everyone has had a dream, and if you haven't, you may not have discovered it yet. I want to have enough financial security that I will never have to eat sandwiches for every meal. In my childhood, that's all we could afford. I don't fault my parents at all. They were doing what they could, but medical bills are difficult and cancer isn't a 'one-night-stay-and-go-home-next-day.' I lost one of my parents to it, and that was hard enough, but to see my other parent go through every bill in their wake and try to feed me and my little brother.. Well. Things got tough. I would love to be financially stable enough to have variety in my diet, and maybe even to help my dad out of debt. I think seeing him without the debt would make both of us successful. We have been climbing this hill for so long."

Thank you everyone for your answers. I really appreciate the responses, and I hope we continue to get more and more.